Global cognitive performance at 4-year follow-up in individuals with atrial fibrillation—findings from The Irish Longitudinal Study on Ageing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Atrial fibrillation (AF) has been proposed as a risk factor for cognitive impairment, even in the absence of a history of stroke. This study investigates whether AF is associated with increased risk of cognitive decline in a community-dwelling population of adults over the age of 50. METHODS: Data from the 1st and 3rd waves of The Irish Longitudinal Study on Ageing (TILDA) were used (4-year follow-up period). TILDA is a large prospective cohort study of community-dwelling adults over the age of 50 in Ireland. AF was assessed via electrocardiogram. Global cognitive function was assessed at baseline and follow-up using Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MOCA). Analysis of global cognition was repeated stratifying by age. Mixed-effects Poisson regression was used to assess for change in rate of errors on MOCA and MOCA subdomains. RESULTS: A total of 3,417 participants were included in the study. Results found that participants with AF had a greater increase in rate of errors on MOCA over 4-year follow-up (incident rate ratio (IRR) 1.18; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.02, 1.37; P-value 0.023). However, this was no longer significant on controlling for age, sex and level of education (IRR 1.08; 95% CI 0.93, 1.25; P-value 0.332). There was no difference when stratifying by age group, or when separating MOCA into subdomains. CONCLUSION: Individuals with AF were more likely to show an increase in rate of errors between waves 1 and 3 (4-year follow-up period) in the TILDA population; however, results were not significant when controlling for age, sex and level of education.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".